Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (108)
- Part of a Book (73)
- Working Paper (41)
- Conference Proceeding (7)
- Report (6)
- Part of Periodical (4)
- Preprint (3)
- Review (2)
- Book (1)
- Periodical (1)
Language
- English (151)
- German (77)
- Croatian (9)
- Multiple languages (4)
- Portuguese (3)
- French (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (246)
Keywords
- Morphologie (29)
- Deutsch (28)
- Verb (24)
- Wortbildung (23)
- Spracherwerb (19)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (16)
- Nominalisierung (15)
- Syntax (12)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (11)
- Semantik (11)
Institute
For this paper, 170 Tibeto-Burman languages were surveyed for nominal ease marking (adpositions), in an attempt to determine ifit would be possible to reeonstruet any ease markers to Proto· Tibeto-Burman, and in so doing leam more about the nature of the grammatieal organization of Proto-Tibeto-Burman. The data were also eross-cheeked for patterns of isomorphy/polysemy, to see ifwe can leam anything about the development ofthe forms we da find in the languages. The results of the survey indicate that although a11 Tibeto-Bunnan languages have developed some sort of relation marking, none of the markers ean be reconstrueted to the oldest stage of the family. Looking at the patterns of isomorphy or polysemy, we find there are regularities to the patterns we find, and on the basis of these regularities we can make assurne that the path of development most probably followed the markedness/prototypicality clines: the locative and ablative use would have arose first and then were extended to the more abstract cases.
U radu se obrađuju načini tvorbe pridjeva, priloga, prijedloga, zamjenica i veznika na primjerima iz Tadijanovićeva djela „Svašta po malo“. Posebno se upozorava na tipove tvorba koji su neobični zbog značenja koje ima tvorenica, na tvorbu neuobičajenih tvorenica prema već postojećim modelima, na različite pristupe i tumačenja u određivanju tvorbenih načina te na odnos motiviranih i nemotiviranih riječi sa stajališta povijesne i suvremene tvorbe. Analizirani se primjeri uspoređuju s potvrdama iz „Rječnika hrvatskoga ili srpskoga jezika JAZU“.
This article addresses the controversial question how non-derived denominal verbs (e.g. wingsuit, kennel, trombone) build their argument structures. Based on selected subsets of conceptually related verbs it will be shown that the argument structures of these verbs are flexible though not arbitrary. Without context, these verbs evoke frame-like default situations which are determined by speakers' shared encyclopaedic knowledge and sensorimotor experience and which are mapped onto a small set of abstract event schemata that 'predesign' thematic configurations. The discourse context, which also provides the syntactic context, either meets or models our expectations as to the context-free readings. In the latter case, new (metaphorical) readings are contextually created. These configurations are not arbitrary either because the meanings of verbalized nouns should always be (a) in a relation of contiguity to the base-noun concepts and (b) compatible with the semantics of the syntactic constructions.
Nominalization in French can be done by means of conversion, which is characterized by the identity between the base and the derived lexeme. Since both noun→verb and verb→noun conversions exist, this property raises directionality issues, and sometimes leads to contradictory analyses of the same examples. The paper presents two approaches of conversion: derivational and non-derivational ones. Then it discusses various criteria used in derivational approaches to determine the direction of conversion: diachronic ones, such as dates of first attestation or etymology; and synchronic ones, such as semantic relations, noun gender or verb inflection. All criteria are evaluated on a corpus of 3,241 French noun~verb pairs. It is shown that none of them enables to identify the direction of conversion in French. Finally, the consequences for the theory of morphology are discussed.
The main tenet of the present paper is the thesis that nominalization – like other cases of derivational morphology – is an essentially lexical phenomenon with well defined syntactic (and semantic) conditions and consequences. More specifically, it will be argued that the relation between a verb and the noun derived from it is subject to both systematic and idiosyncratic conditions with respect to lexical as well as syntactic aspects.
One of the striking features in modern Newari noun phrases is the wide usage of a set of affixes found in combination with the various elements that may expand a noun into an endocentric construction. At first sight such affixation would appear as a linking device by which the subordinate constituents of a noun phrase are tied to their head noun. Closer investigation, however, reveals a more complex picture which I have attempted to outline in the following paragraphs. The results of this inspection lead to the conclusion that the pattern of affixation displayed in Newari mirrors the close interaction of two converse functional principles: both the syntagmatic function of nominal determination on the one hand and a paradigmatic function – the formation of certain types of lexicalized expressions in Newari – formally tie in with each other by the application of one common technique.
It is well-known that in many if not most Sino-Tibetan languages relative clause and attribute/genitive markers are identical with nominalization devices and that sentences bearing such markers can also function as independent utterances (cf. Matisoff 1972, Kölver 1977, DeLancey 1989, Genetti 1992, Ebert 1994, Bickel 1995, Noonan 1997, etc.). This morphological convergence of syntactic functions, which we may dub the ‘Standard Sino-Tibetan Nominalization’ (SSTN) pattern, is particularly prominent in some languages spoken in the eastern and southeastern part of the Kirant because these languages not only feature prenominal relative clauses, but also allow, albeit as a minor type, internally headed constructions.
Nominalinkorporation
(1980)
Inkorporation ist [...] eine Technik, die zur Wortkomplexität beiträgt. Es handelt sich dabei um eine besondere Art von Wortbildung: eine (evtl. mehrere) Prädikatsbestimmung (Subjekt, direktes Objekt, adverbiale Bestimmungen) wird ins Prädikat einverleibt. Das besondere an dieser Wortbildungstechnik ist – A. ihre syntaktische Relevanz: es werden zwei syntaktische Elemente zu einem Wort komponiert; gleichzeitig muss aber betont werden, dass die ursprüngliche syntaktische Relation der Mitglieder in dem Kompositum nicht unverändert bestehen bleibt; – B. die Offenheit des Prozesses, die erlaubt, Inkorporation sowohl gegenüber Derivationsprozessen als auch gegenüber anderen Arten von Komposition abzugrenzen. [...] Die hier relevanten Prädikatsbestimmungen (diejenigen also, die inkorporiert werden können) sind zwar nicht immer, aber vorwiegend durch Nomina realisiert. In dieser Arbeit wird nur die Inkorporation von Nomina berücksichtigt.
Die hier zu besprechende Dissertation des schwedischen Germanisten Nicolaus Janos Raag ist an der Universität Uppsala (Schweden) unter der Betreuung von Dessislava Stoeva-Holm entstanden. Die Arbeit will zeigen, welche Rolle Substantivkomposita im Rahmen der Wissensvermittlung und des Kulturtransfers spielen, wie deutsche Komposita lateinisch vermittelte Inhalte in die eigene frühmittelalterliche klösterliche Kultur der Rezipienten integrieren und welche Veränderungen sie dabei erfahren. Für die Untersuchung wurden Substantivkomposita ausgewählt, da sie prädestiniert für die Benennung von bisher Unbekanntem sind und durch ihre binäre Struktur die Fähigkeit besitzen, zwei Größen zueinander in Beziehung zu setzen, wobei die semantische Relation zwischen den Konstituenten eines Kompositums prinzipiell offen und auf morphologischer Ebene nicht ausgedrückt ist.